🪐
Cantina Docs
  • 🪐Welcome to Cantina
  • 🤝Services
    • Security Reviews
    • Competitions
    • Bug Bounty
    • Guilds
    • Public Goods
  • 💵Referral program
  • 📄Public Reports
  • 👑Reputation
  • 👥Cantina Account
    • 🔷Claim an Account
    • 🔷Company Account
      • 🔹Create a Company Account
      • 🔹Managing users
      • 🔹Company Dashboard
      • 🔹Company Reviews
    • 🔷Security Researcher Account
      • 🔹Create Security Researcher Account
      • 🔹Security Researcher Dashboard
      • 🔹Calendar
      • 🔹Reviews
      • 🔹KYC and Payments
  • 💻Cantina Code
    • 🕵️Cantina Code for Security Researchers
      • 🔶Code Review
        • 🔸Download content and toggle sidebar
        • 🔸Highlighting code
      • 🔶Findings
        • 🔸Findings Submission
        • 🔸Findings Labels
        • 🔸Findings Status
        • 🔸Add code to existing finding
        • 🔸Examples
      • 🔶Chat
      • 🔶Reports
      • 🔶Comments & Pings
      • 🔶Diagrams & Formulas
    • 🏢Cantina Code for Companies
      • 🗄️Responding to Pings
      • 🗄️Responding to Findings
      • 🗄️Report Generation
  • 🏆Cantina Competitions
    • 🕵️For Security Researchers
      • 🔶Payments
      • 🔶Teams
      • 🔶Finding Status
      • 🔶Finding Labels
    • 🏢For Companies
      • 🗄️Competition Submission Template
    • 🧑‍⚖️Judging Process
      • 📜Finding Severity Criteria
      • 📜Scoring
      • 📜Judging Phase
      • 📜Escalation Process
    • 🤝 Fellowship Steward Model
  • 💰 Cantina Bounties
    • Bounty Severity Classification
    • Mediation Process for Bounties
  • ✅ Cantina Bug Bounty Coverage
    • Cantina Coverage Details
  • ❓FAQ
    • ❔FAQ Competitions
    • ❔FAQ Security Reviews
  • 🔗Links
Powered by GitBook
On this page
  1. Cantina Competitions
  2. Judging Process

Judging Phase

Judge Responsibilities

During this phase, judges are responsible of handling different operation for findings.

These are extended and not limited to managing thorough duplication of all raised issues, which helps in identifying and filtering out obvious low or invalid concerns.

They are tasked with evaluating issues based on established rules and may seek feedback from sponsors when necessary to make informed judgments. Furthermore, judges facilitate a system of escalation, allowing researchers to present additional information for reevaluation of their issues. In such scenarios, judges provide valuable feedback, incorporating the sponsor's perspective if needed.

Ultimately, while judges contribute significantly to the reassessment process, the final decision often resides with the Cantina internal team, ensuring that all judgments are well-considered and equitable.

PreviousScoringNextEscalation Process

Last updated 1 month ago

🏆
🧑‍⚖️
📜